Four men have been acquitted by a Delhi court in a 2019 acid attack case, with the court citing the prosecution's failure to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt. The decision was largely influenced by an unexplained 18-month delay in registering the First Information Report (FIR), critical lapses in the investigation, and the destruction of vital physical evidence, including the victim's clothing, in a fire. The court noted a lack of independent witnesses, uncollected CCTV footage, and the non-recovery of key items like the acid container and motorcycles, alongside unrefuted defence evidence regarding the accused's whereabouts. These cumulative factors led to the acquittal of Preet Pal, Ramesh, Bablu Kumar, and Suresh Chand.

Four men have been acquitted by a Delhi court in a 2019 acid attack case, with the court citing the prosecution's failure to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt. The decision was largely influenced by an unexplained 18-month delay in registering the First Information Report (FIR), critical lapses in the investigation, and the destruction of vital physical evidence, including the victim's clothing, in a fire. The court noted a lack of independent witnesses, uncollected CCTV footage, and the non-recovery of key items like the acid container and motorcycles, alongside unrefuted defence evidence regarding the accused's whereabouts. These cumulative factors led to the acquittal of Preet Pal, Ramesh, Bablu Kumar, and Suresh Chand.

Four men have been acquitted by a Delhi court in a 2019 acid attack case, with the court citing the prosecution's failure to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt. The decision was largely influenced by an unexplained 18-month delay in registering the First Information Report (FIR), critical lapses in the investigation, and the destruction of vital physical evidence, including the victim's clothing, in a fire. The court noted a lack of independent witnesses, uncollected CCTV footage, and the non-recovery of key items like the acid container and motorcycles, alongside unrefuted defence evidence regarding the accused's whereabouts. These cumulative factors led to the acquittal of Preet Pal, Ramesh, Bablu Kumar, and Suresh Chand.

A Delhi court has acquitted four men in a 2019 acid-attack case, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt amid an unexplained 18-month delay in registering the FIR, gaps in the investigation and the loss of crucial physical evidence.

The case began with an alleged attack on Renu in Sangam Vihar on July 9, 2019. According to the prosecution, she was returning home after finishing work as a labourer when four men arrived on two motorcycles. Preet Pal was allegedly riding one motorcycle with his father Ramesh, while Bablu Kumar and Suresh Chand were on the other. The prosecution alleged that the men threw acid or a chemical liquid on Renu’s back and waist.

Renu reportedly experienced severe burning and raised an alarm. Passers-by gathered at the spot and poured water on her back before police arrived. She was taken to Safdarjung Hospital, where her medical examination recorded one per cent chemical burn injuries on her waist and back. Her clothes were also seized by the police.

But what followed became central to the trial. Although the incident, the complainant’s statement and her medical examination were all recorded on July 9, 2019, the formal FIR was registered only on January 7, 2021, almost 18 months later. The court found no satisfactory explanation for why the case remained pending for such a prolonged period.

The delay became particularly significant because the prosecution alleged that the attack was connected to an earlier POCSO complaint against Preet Pal. According to the complainant’s version, the accused threatened her with further violence and allegedly warned that acid would be thrown on her daughter if she did not withdraw that case.

The investigation, however, failed to build the evidentiary chain needed to sustain the allegations.

The court noted that independent public witnesses who allegedly came to Renu’s assistance were not examined. Potentially important CCTV footage from the area was not collected. The alleged container used to throw the corrosive substance was never recovered, nor were the motorcycles allegedly used by the accused.

The prosecution also lost a key piece of physical evidence during the long course of the trial. The clothes worn by Renu and seized immediately after the incident were subsequently destroyed in a fire at the malkhana in 2024. This meant that the material evidence could no longer be produced and examined in court.

The defence also produced evidence concerning the whereabouts of some of the accused on the day of the alleged attack. The court found that this evidence was not effectively rebutted by the prosecution.

In his judgment dated September 28, Additional Sessions Judge Hargurvarinder Singh Jaggi closely examined these gaps before acquitting Preet Pal, Ramesh, Suresh Chand and Bablu Kumar of charges under Sections 326B, 195A, 506 and 34 of the IPC.

Judge Jaggi said the prosecution had miserably failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. He referred to pervasive doubt, systemic investigative lapses, unexplained delay, and unrefuted defence evidence in extending the benefit of doubt to the accused.

TAGS